淡化行为对商标的损害并不是显而易见的，而是间接通过某些侵权行为作用在商

The damage to trademarks caused by the dilution is not obvious, but indirectly acts on goods or services through certain infringements, which seriously disrupts the order of the market economy and causes irreparable losses to enterprises and consumers. The American scholar Shecht pointed out in his article on trademark protection that the existence of a trademark can show consumers the credibility of the product. It is the consumer who trusts the product in their hearts and can buy with confidence. Then we really need to protect What is it is based on the sales ability stimulated by this function of the trademark. The distinguishing function of a trademark shows its uniqueness. American scholar Frank Skyt made the following conclusions on how to protect the uniqueness of trademarks. If we use the same or similar trademarks on different products without causing confusion among the relevant public, consumers can still clearly realize what they are. What kind of trademark is attached to the purchased goods. Although this does not infringe the trademark rights of the trademark owner to some extent, the uniqueness of the trademark will be gradually consumed over time, and long-term considerations will still give The damage caused by the trademark owner is also the original situation of trademark anti-dilution

The damage to trademarks by dilution is not obvious, but indirectly through certain torts on goods or services, seriously disrupting the order of the market economy, to enterprises and consumers to bring irreparable losses. In his article on trademark protection, the American scholar Shecht pointed out that the existence of a trademark is to show the credibility of the goods to consumers, is the consumer in the hearts of the goods to have confidence and then to buy, then what we really want to protect is based on the trademark of this function to stimulate the sales capacity. The distinctive function of a trademark shows its uniqueness. Frank Skate, an American scholar, argues that if we use the same or similar trademarks on top of different goods and do not cause confusion among the public, consumers will still be able to be aware of what kind of trademarks are attached to the goods they purchase, although to some extent, it can be said that there is no infringement of the trademark rights of the trademark owner, but with the time to wash away, the uniqueness of the trademark will be gradually consumed, and long-term consideration will still cause damage to the trademark owner, This is also the original situation of trademark anti-fade.

The damage to trademark caused by dilution is not obvious, but indirectly acts on goods or services through some infringement acts, which seriously disturbs the market economic order and brings irreparable losses to enterprises and consumers. In his article on trademark protection, American scholar Richard Schechter pointed out that the existence of trademarks is to show consumers the reputation of goods, and consumers can trust the goods in their hearts and then purchase with confidence. What we really want to protect is based on the sales ability stimulated by the function of trademarks. The distinguishing function of trademark shows its uniqueness. American scholar Frank skett made the following judgment on how to protect the uniqueness of trademarks. If we use the same or similar trademarks on different goods, consumers will still be able to clearly realize what kind of trademarks are attached to the goods they buy, although to some extent, this does not infringe the trademark rights of trademark owners, However, as time goes by, the uniqueness of the trademark will be gradually consumed, and the long-term consideration will still bring damage to the trademark owner, which is also the initial situation of trademark anti dilution